DECODING THE IDEA AND MYTHS OF A COALITION
With the NDP now musing about forming a post- election coalition with the Liberals, Canada soon could be entering the politically grey area Americans find so bewildering: An election ends and the nation has to ask the Queen’s representative who will be in
Q Is there anything stopping a coalition government from running Canada?
A It would certainly be an evolution. But there isn’t anything in the Westminster tradition that makes it inappropriate, and there’s no reason it couldn’t happen. I don’t think we need to be in a position of extremis for a coalition to be a legitimate political option.
Q Suppose the NDP and the Liberals decide to form a coalition. Is this one of those rare times where our governor general actually gets to do something?
A Yes, and affect the outcome in a significant and unpredictable way.
Q How does this work? Say it’s Oct. 20: There’s a Conservatives minority and the other parties have shaken hands on a coalition. What does the governor general do?
A He invites the leader who’s returned the most number of seats to form a government. Then, the other parties deliver a vote of non- confidence and the government falls almost immediately. But instead of immediately dissolving Parliament, the governor general invites the leader of the second- place party to form a government.
Q So we could soon see the shortest sitting of a Parliament in Canadian history?
A Yes.
Q Do we really have to set up the House of Commons for 45 minutes just to declare a motion of non- confidence?
A Yes, unless the winning party doesn’t push for the right to form a government.
Q Coalitions are all the rage in other Westminster- style parliaments, including Westminster itself. Why has Canada traditionally been so squeamish about this sort of thing?
A Canadians think they’re electing governments, but really, we’re supposed to be electing a parliament. We don’t elect prime ministers, and maybe — because of our proximity to the United States — we think that we are. There is a sense that the party who gets the most seats is the defacto government in waiting.
Q Coalitions have been proposed before — most notably in 2008 — but they’ve usually been dismissed as sneaky power grabs. What might be different this time?
A I think the unpopularity in 2008 was largely around the separatist element ( the Bloc Quebecois had agreed to vote with the Liberals and the NDP on confidence motions). What you’ve got now is effectively a three- party system, where one party is on one end of the continuum and two are on the other. In fact, the evenly divided nature of the returns ( at least according to the latest poll data) seems in itself to be a mandate to form a coalition. Over time, I could see a shift in public opinion, where Canadians start to see power as belonging to one side of the political continuum, rather than any one party.
Q What’s the worst- case scenario?
A It’s hard to say without knowing what the returns are or — consider this — what if the coalition has no representation in a significant region of the country, like Quebec or the West? But I’d say the worst case scenario would be to have a prolonged period of uncertainty where we don’t know who’s in charge. That, or immediately getting plunged into another election.